Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill

Kia ora, Madam Speaker. Thank you for letting me see us into dinner time and speak on the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill. I just want to commend my National Party colleague who just resumed her seat, Penny Simmonds. Yes, we do have a lot more work to do, and we will continue to do that work to ensure that discrimination is just done away with in all parts of our society. This is a small step in that process, and I’m grateful, as a member of the Social Services and Community Committee, to have been part of this process to ensure that our disability community are yet again more normalised. But, as I said, we have a long way to go.

In terms of this piece of legislation, I won’t go over what’s already been said, because, pretty much, the essence of the simplicity but effectiveness of this piece of legislation has been talked about. It’s around non-discrimination, but it’s, obviously, around ableism around disability assist dogs. It’s about changing some wording but, more than that, giving greater access for people in terms of their everyday lives, getting around and about.

I just want to really briefly touch on this—and Penny Simmonds did mention that, and we’re happy to keep talking in terms of what we do. At the moment, under section 2 of the Dog Control Act, there are certified organisations that look after it—for example Assistance Dogs New Zealand, Hearing Dogs for Deaf People New Zealand, K9 Medical Detection New Zealand, K9 SEARCH Medical Detection, Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust, New Zealand Epilepsy Assist Dogs Trust, Perfect Partners Assistance Dogs Trust, and, of course, the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind Incorporated, which is Blind Low Vision New Zealand.

Again, in terms of my learning in this process, it seemed really simplistic to me what a disability assist dog does. But, as I listened to the submissions—as I listened to submissions from some of these organisations and from individuals—it was everything from support for people with autism, cerebral palsy, or diabetes through to the detection of cancer and other diseases as well as performing tasks such as picking up and retrieving items, alerting the owner to an upcoming medical episode, finding help, opening doors, and interrupting behaviour—and the list goes on. It’s incredible to know that our canine friends are so intelligent and that we can, hopefully, join them in that intelligence, because dogs just love people and we need to ensure that we love people and we need to ensure that people aren’t discriminated against.

This piece of legislation does all of that. I want to thank Ricardo Menéndez March for making sure it was in the ballot and again thank Mojo Mathers. Sadly, she wasn’t able to draw it when she was in this House, but at least her legacy continues in this place.

Hon Member: For ever.

GLEN BENNETT: For ever, exactly.

In closing, I just want to thank all those—for example, the Ministry of Justice, the clerks of the committee, the Office for Disability Issues, our submitters, and our select committee. But I also want to thank those who go out of their way to train disability assist dogs. There are many volunteers that have these dogs in their homes to prepare them for their life of work and service. I want to thank them. Finally, I want to thank the disability community for yet again being patient with us, coming along with us, and ensuring that we can continue to build a more inclusive society. I commend this bill to the House.

Sitting suspended from 6.02 p.m. to 7 p.m.

Thank you so much. Look, it’s a pleasure to be able to support this bill. I’d just like to reiterate some of the comments of my colleague Penny Simmonds, our disability spokesperson, who’s talked about putting in a Supplementary Order Paper in the committee of the whole House stage on the basis that there’s some issues around who can actually train these dogs. I’m happy to support this because actually disability issues are human rights issues. Many of us either have disability issues or have family with disability issues. I say that not to say, “Gosh, there are some people here with disability issues.”, but it’s because we’re just like representatives of New Zealanders and this is a normal part of people’s lives—that they have to sometimes deal with disabilities and you just never know when it’s going to strike.

One of the things I really liked about this is the acknowledgment of the fact that this is a mainstream issue, because this is something that everybody has to either deal with sometime in their lives or else a family member or a friend of theirs will. I was very pleased to see the work that Corrections did when I was first their Minister around training of disability dogs and I saw this happening in the women’s prison at Wiri in Auckland—just how good it was to be able to see the first of those dogs come out from that training programme. I was very pleased to be the Minister there. I know where some of those dogs went and I know that they really contributed vastly to people’s enjoyment of life, their quality of life, and actually also the friendship that a dog can bring.

I want to also acknowledge Mojo Mathers, who was an MP and was the person who actually first brought this issue to the House, citing some issues—anecdotally, but still issues—where people had found that they were discriminated against because their dogs were not able to get access to be with them at various times. I’d also like to acknowledge Ricardo Menéndez March, who has picked up this bill from Mojo Mathers and has been able to continue with it.

These dogs, those of us who have seen them working, being part of someone’s family, helping people who can’t in many cases do things like open their front door, can’t pick up their phone—the dogs will go and pick up the phone, bring it to them. They probably don’t answer them that well, but at least they pick it up. Those dogs make a huge difference to people’s lives, and they don’t have to be particularly special dogs. They just have to be dogs that are big enough to do those tasks and are properly trained. When we look at the training, the trainers who actually do this, they work with people in, for instance, Corrections to be able to have prisoners and others train these dogs. It not only worked in the women’s prison but the second time I was Minister of Corrections, at that stage it had actually moved to Spring Hill prison as well, where male prisoners were taking these dogs in from almost zero training and actually training them so that they would contribute to the wellbeing and happiness of those who were less able.

This is a really good thing to do and it is a terrible thing to think that there are people who would not understand just how important these disability dogs are. They make the difference for people whether or not they can get a phone call, whether or not they can open their front door, whether or not they can put their washing machine on. These dogs are so well trained, and this is something that we believe is a very important human right—that people should be able to, no matter what their disability status or what their status is, be able to access this most basic of human rights. So happy to support this bill.

Kia ora, te Māngai o te Whare. It’s a joy to be able to stand and take a call on this bill, and I mean that quite literally. It is a joy to be able to stand and take a call on this bill, because I take this call on this small but perfectly formed bill in the peculiar situation of actually experiencing temporary disability. And so I am ever more aware of, as my chair on the Social Services and Community Committee, Angie Warren-Clark, said earlier, “There but for the grace of God.” Because it is one in four New Zealanders who identify themselves as having a permanent impairment that cannot be easily overcome. I note that for adults, accidents and injuries are a leading cause of permanent disability, and I note that that is particularly the case for men. But I’m glad, or not so glad, to be blazing a trail for the women in this case, as my own temporary experience of disability came as the result of a particularly unedifying accident involving shoelaces and Mount Taranaki. It is humbling to experience the reality of impairment.

In this House—I actually had a look to see how many of our members have walked around this place with physical impairment, and I noted that the first one appears to be a Clutha Mackenzie, who was blinded in World War I. But then there is the remarkable, if somewhat divisive, early Labour member John A. Lee, who lost his right arm, also in World War I. We then have a series of other MPs who came here as veterans having lost arms and legs; and then we went on to Margaret Wilson, who, of course, walked these corridors as an amputee; and then the great Mojo Mathers, to whom we are all indebted tonight and whose legacy in this House Ricardo Menéndez March has so ably picked up.

As I have walked around this House, it has really struck me how small things are difficult, since I had this accident and broke my leg. It is incredible how difficult it is to do the tiniest things, whether it is achieving my personal goal for the last two months, which was to be able to walk on one crutch and a moon boot so that I could carry a cup of tea. It’s something so simple, and yet, without assistance, I have been incapable of attaining sufficient quantities of my favourite beverage, which, as my colleagues and my family will attest, has not been good for harmony in the household.

So when I look at this bill, this small but perfectly formed bill that my colleague brought to us in the Social Services and Community Committee, I think what’s really important about it is it addresses the ableist concept that disability dogs might only include the guide dog and the blind assistance dog, of whom we are all aware. But as my colleagues have said, disability assist dogs and the capacity of our canine companions to alleviate and enable and facilitate our full lives as people with impairments—they go so much further. So I note that one of the leading causes of disability amongst children is actually psychological or psychiatric impairment or learning disability. And in that respect, it is really interesting to consider that we have dogs out there who are able to anticipate when an epilepsy attack is coming on, when a heart attack is coming on, when a narcolepsy attack might be coming on, or even diabetes, or respond to anaphylaxis. As the mother of a child with a serious anaphylactic reaction who has had periods where we’ve had to travel with several EpiPens upon us, that prospect, and the life-affirming and enabling prospect of having a canine companion who could actually ring the alarm when there is such an incident, is a remarkable thing.

But at the same time, amongst the 75 submitters who were community minded enough to participate in this process, we heard of the range of impacts that the denial of the full range of canine assistance—we heard about the impact that’s had. Whether it is the inability to get a rental property without quite elaborate ways of explaining to the landlord how important that might be, whether it is getting into a shop to have a coffee, whether it is getting on a bus—these are all normal aspects of life, but without making this change, which will, hopefully, bring about the wider awareness of the importance of disability assist dogs, people have been forced to limit themselves and limit their lives. And that is the agenda of this party on this side of the House when it comes to disability: we want to pursue policies that are about enabling people living with disabilities to live good lives and productive lives. That is why we have set up the Ministry for Disabled People, that is why we are pursuing a range of Budget initiatives to fund programmes which will assist people with disabilities, and that is why we are so very pleased to be able to support this particular bill.

One of the things I did want to just be able to talk about, because I think it’s an aspect of what we do—in my life prior to breaking the leg and coming to this wonderful House, I worked quite a bit in trying to make the court a more friendly place for people with vulnerabilities, both physical and intellectual and also speech, which, I noticed, is one of the other major disabilities for children. And one of the ways in which we attempted to get the court to open up and be more accommodating of disability was to introduce court support dogs. There was, unfortunately—Whangārei was leading the charge, we did have a support dog ready to go into court, a delightful labradoodle, but we were pipped at the post. We were pipped at the post by Tauranga.

Angie Warren-Clark: Aha!

Dr EMILY HENDERSON: Yes, those Taurangians were very quick to see what good things Whangārei was introducing, and they had a wonderful dog called Louie—Louie the Labrador—who actually met, in his early role, I believe it was Minister Amy Adams, when she was justice Minister. The impact of Louie on the ability of traumatised and emotionally distressed children to come to court and to give their evidence with clarity and assurance was really remarkable, and that is the experience that’s been found when those same emotional support dogs are used in other courts around the world. There is quite extensive literature. Now, unfortunately, in getting ready to give this speech, I discovered that Louie passed away quite recently. I hope that out there somewhere there is Louis number two. Maybe we will get up to Louie XVI. Who knows? I see a blond Labrador Sun King.

But in whatever we do, the point is that disability needs to be recognised in the full gamut, and we, as a society, as a Parliament, and as a Government need to be putting in place the full range of measures that would allow people living with disabilities to live good, productive lives and live up to their potential. And with that, and with some gratitude, I now take my seat and the pressure off the moon boot. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise and speak on the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill. When I was thinking about the conversations I’ve had around disabilities over the years and the connection that it has to me with my family, as I have family members that have relied on guide dogs and other things, and also family members that suffer from learning disabilities and other issues—and a lot of it is confidence and feeling like you belong and not being afraid to go out and do the things you really want to do. By changing the definition to a disability assist dog, I think it just gives people confidence to go out and know that businesses now know they are obligated to not discriminate against service dogs, really, because these aren’t dogs; these are working dogs that are doing a job and assisting these people to be the best that they can be.

I have stood up on many occasions here and said sometimes it’s the littlest things that make the biggest difference. It’s about, as I just said before, making sure that we put things in place in this Parliament to help people be the best that they can be, and I feel that this bill does achieve that. So I’d just also like to give a little plug to how animals can help us in many ways. Seeing as it’s St John’s Heart of Gold Annual Appeal Week, I’d just like to mention their therapy pet programme that they have. They go along with pets and visit people, and it’s been found that animals can help people with their wellbeing and with their mental health. So there are many ways that animals help us in this life, and I feel that the more we acknowledge it, the further we’ll get when it comes to disabilities, and we will find animals that will do even more than what they’re already doing.

So when it comes to my family members that I know that have used disability assist dogs, they’re also like family. So when you discriminate against a dog that you’re taking out with you to live your normal everyday life, you’re not just discriminating against the person, you’re also discriminating against an animal that is just doing its job. So we need to stop looking at these animals as pets and start looking at them as an extension of the person that they’re beside, and treat them with the respect that they deserve.

Out of the 75 submissions we heard, pretty much all of them were in favour and expressed that the bill would bring a positive outcome to the disabled community. But what I really would like to mention is this opened up new avenues of the way we do things within our select committees. So not only did it bring the attention to the disability assist dogs, it brought attention to the fact that there are many barriers for the disabled community.

I’m really proud of the fact that our select committee, the Social Services and Community Committee, is taking on a role of leading the charge in making Parliament more accessible to the disabled community. We’ve had a lot of different ways of promoting how the disabled community can submit to us in ways that fit with how they are capable of submitting. We’ve had interpreters within our select committee—even on our Zoom meetings we’ve managed to get interpreters in—and we’ve also had the captions added to the bottom of our submissions for the disabled community that’s watching and trying to follow what’s going on. So I’m really proud of that and I feel we’re learning a lot and we’re also opening up our eyes to the barriers that we take for granted every day. Some people, just as I’ve said, just want to be the best that they can be. And if we can help just a little bit with that, then that makes me proud to be part of the select committee I’m on. Thank you very much to everyone on our select committee that has made that possible.

So I hope that this small change makes a big difference in the lives of people when they go out and they don’t have the fear of being turned away and discriminated against the next time they walk into a shop just to live their lives. With that, I support this bill.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. As always, it’s an honour and a privilege to stand up as the member of Parliament for the Ōtaki electorate but also as a member of the Social Services and Community Committee who heard the 75 submissions, all in favour of this bill. It makes sense. It’s a common-sense bill, so no surprise there that everyone supported it. It is a real privilege to stand in support of this bill, the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill—really long, quite a small change, but really effective.

Can I, first, congratulate the member who’s championing this bill through, Mr Ricardo Menéndez March. First of all, congratulations for pulling the bill out of the biscuit tin—that’s amazing—but also for making sure that this is the bill that you chose to champion and bring this kaupapa to the Chamber. It’s so important and I know your passion around people with disabilities and being able to support that community. So, really proud of that. Thank you very much for that.

Also, I wanted to pick up—and I know other people have talked about this already—currently, we know that the Human Rights Act had guide dogs in there, who have got protection and who have got rights to be able to accompany their companion or their person with a sight impairment or who may be blind, guide them through buildings, on buses, and in taxis, with no issues—and as it should be; there shouldn’t be any issues around that. But, as we also know, people who are sight impaired and blind aren’t the only ones that need assistance from disability assist dogs. So while the guide dogs have those protections and those rights, currently we know that the disability assist dogs don’t, which means, like my colleague across the way from our Social Services and Community Committee mentioned, that the person with a disability also is discriminated against when people don’t allow that person to bring their dog in.

Also, I would mimic that these are not pets. These dogs have a job to do. Their job is to keep that person safe. We know, again, that there are many reasons that someone might need a disability assist dog and that isn’t, again, just sight impaired, but it could also be for your ears, for alerts, and for many other varieties of issues. So, for that, we need to also make sure that when people do go into buildings, into taxis, or into buses that they don’t end up having to justify why they need to bring the disability assist dog that will keep them safe from harm with them on those travels or in that building.

This, again, is just a small change, but it’s mighty, right? So changing it to a “disability assist dog” rather than “guide dog” in the Human Rights Act is going to mean that, like I said, all of our working dogs in terms of disabilities are recognised. But also it changes and modernises the out-of-date language that’s currently in the Human Rights Act.

I would also say that we heard from many of the 75 submitters and some of those that had real-life, lived experience in terms of disabilities. I myself have 12 years’ experience both here and overseas in working with people with disabilities and mental health, both in the Ōtaki electorate—so working at Kimberley Centre; can’t get much more dual diagnosis, disability and mental health, than that—and also in Wellington as well with supported employment.

I can say that I have worked with someone who had severe anxiety due to other things that had happened in her past, and it was a real issue to even get past her driveway and out. So when this person did have to venture out to doctor’s appointments and what not, they were able to take their disability assist dog with them, and, even though she may still have a panic attack, that disability assist dog, having been with her for some time, knew when that was coming on, was able to bring her down by his body language and the way they communicated, bring her breathing down, get her to calm back down and be able to calmly make her way back home. That’s just one of the many.

I had another young man that I worked with who had severe epilepsy, grade-A seizures, and we actually helped to support him into work, into a butchery. With him, his disability assist guide dog knew when that grade-A seizure was coming on. What that meant was that dog was able to alert him, if he didn’t already feel it himself, but also alert people around him so that they would give him space, and, hopefully, when he could, he could get himself into a position or into a space where there would be less harm to him when his episode did come on and that, hopefully, physically he would be OK once he came out of that. That’s what that disability assist dog was able to do. That was that dog’s job: to be able to keep that person as safe as they could and warn them, like I said, as well as warning other people around them. There are so many more examples.

This bill makes sure that if we are truly going to say that we’re supporting people with disabilities, if we’re truly saying that we’re going to give true accessibility, if we are truly saying that we want people with disabilities to be able to be independent, live their best lives, and be part of our society, then this is, if you like, a tool, in terms of being a disability assist dog, that they need to be able to do all those things.

That is why, again, while it’s a small change, it’s mighty. We know—and, again, working in that space and listening to the submitters—the difference that’s going to make for many of our people in our disabilities community. I think, too, having this where it’s legal, a change in the Human Rights Act, they have something to fall back on when they are challenged in terms of entering a shop or they are challenged in terms of bringing their dog on the bus. It’s not a pet. It’s not there just for company or to look good or in someone’s handbag; it’s actually there to do a job, to make sure that they’re keeping that person safe, to be maybe that person’s eyes, maybe that person’s ears, maybe that person’s alertness so they—like one of my colleagues sad earlier—you know, prevent a heart attack. That is the significance of one change—well, a name change, I guess. But within that name change, so much good will come, especially for our disability community.

So, again, I just want to say that I’m really proud to stand with this bill and support this bill. It absolutely makes sense. It absolutely gets rid of that discrimination and makes sure that everybody in New Zealand gets to live their best lives. So, for that, I commend the bill to the House.

In the words of Winston McCarthy, this time I call Nicola Grigg—five minutes.

I’ll try not to disappoint, Mr Speaker.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): Five minutes.

NICOLA GRIGG: Much has been made of the benefits and merits of this bill, so we on this side of the House are going to keep it short and succinct this evening. The purpose of this bill is that it will ensure that all people who need assistance from a dog are protected from discrimination on the basis of having a disability. I think it’s probably fair to say that people who live with a disability, no matter what kind, probably find life difficult enough as it is. The last thing they need is further discrimination thrown at them.

It’s a very simple change, but it will make a big difference. That change is made by replacing the words “guide dog” with “disability assist dog” in the Human Rights Act. This change would mean that anywhere that a service is denied to a person with a disability because of the fact they are in the company of a dog or have a dog with them would be seen as a discrimination under the Human Rights Act.

It’s been widely canvassed this evening that disability assist dogs are a valuable service to many, many New Zealanders who enhance their life experience and also give them that essential companionship. As it stands, the Human Rights Act only protects against discrimination of those with guide dogs. It doesn’t protect against discrimination of the likes of hearing dogs, mobility dogs, epilepsy dogs, and so on and so forth.

Also, it does account for the training for the assistance of these dogs with specific tasks. I do hope the Government endorses the Supplementary Order Paper mentioned by my colleague Penny Simmonds. That would expand and enhance those trainers with those specific skills to give them the necessary accreditation as well.

This change will give these dogs—and, importantly, their owners—the same protections given to guide dogs that they have enjoyed for 30 years. I also commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to stand up just to talk briefly about the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill. I think we need to place this bill in what’s really a tapestry of legislation which is increasingly not just recognising but doing much more than that—kind of legitimising and putting on equal footing those members of the disability community. This is just one small part of that. I mean, we wouldn’t for a moment dream of telling people that they couldn’t enter somewhere because they had a wheelchair or a walking stick or a moon boot, indeed. But the suggestion here is that people who come in with dogs, which are just as essential to them being able to access as much as possible the amenity that ordinary able people can, are in some ways discriminated against. So congratulations to Mr Menéndez March for identifying this as an issue and recognising that this, you know, slim bill is an important step towards that.

I guess, it’s really a signal—and I want to recognise, having had it reported back from the select committee, the fact that the select committee went out of its way to make sure that its own process was accessible. I think that’s something that all select committees would do well to take note of, just to make sure that those barriers which able people perhaps don’t see—that we turn our minds specifically to them and ask the question: “Well, you know, how is this going to be approachable for someone with low or no vision, or low or no hearing, or limited mobility, or any other number—or neurodiverse?” My own Youth MP is neurodiverse and I must say she is teaching me a lot about the challenges that face people whose disabilities may not be immediately apparent. So when we do see someone—and I notice that it’s identified in this bill—perhaps with a companion dog, a dog that is an assistance dog, that we don’t leap to conclusions about the need or otherwise for that assistance, that we don’t leap to some sort of judgment but we accept in good faith that that animal is there for a reason because as soon as we make an assumption, we run the risk of, essentially, being discriminatory.

I think we have made leaps and bounds in years in some areas. But I do think that in respect of disabilities, and especially in respect of disabilities which aren’t immediately apparent to us—that aren’t mobility disabilities or the like—we can sometimes brush them aside as trivial. I guess I’m challenging us here in the House, in our select committees, to just pause and engage—engage with the disability community and ask. Don’t tell what the right thing to do is but ask: “What can we do to come to you?”; not, “How can we make it easier for you to come to us?” but really for us to cross the bridge to them rather than the other way round.

So, again, congratulations to the member for this bill. Obviously, the Human Rights Act—and I think it’s important to recognise, you know, this piece of what is constitutional legislation is not static, and it will never be static, because our society evolves and we increasingly recognise and extend and expand our human rights horizon. I’m very glad to see that we’re doing this in respect of, you know, companion and assistance animals that make the lives of these people in the disabled community that much better. So, very happy on this side of the House to commend it.

It looks like a small piece of—you know, a change of a definition and an inclusion in the Human Rights Act but I can see that for some people, this will actually be transformative. This will make them be able to go places they couldn’t go before with a sense of pride and a sense of not having to apologise for the fact that they’re bringing this companion animal with them. So, once again, to Mr Menéndez March, well done. Congratulations on identifying this and moving just one step further on the journey of making sure that all New Zealanders can fully participate in our community. Kia ora, Mr Speaker.

Tēnā koe e te Māngai. It’s a privilege to stand and speak on the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill. First and foremost, it’s important to acknowledge the genesis of this bill which came from Mojo Mathers, who had many previous bills that have furthered the rights of the disability community in New Zealand—and this is yet another one. I’d like to also acknowledge Ricardo Menéndez for taking on this bill. I think it’s really important that we continue to have these debates and continue to talk about how we can improve accessibility in New Zealand; no matter how small those steps are, they’re important ones.

This bill amends the Human Rights Act 1993 to enhance the protection from discrimination for people who rely on disability assist dogs. And it, quite rightly, identifies a very clear issue: that, currently, Section 21 of the Human Rights Act only references “guide dogs” in its definition of disability. This bill takes a step to fix that issue by changing the wording to the broader term of “disability assist dog”, as defined out of the Dog Control Act in 1996, ensuring that those who rely on the kinds of disability assist dogs are afforded the protections that currently exist for people with guide dogs.

The example that springs to mind is the person who wants to step on a bus with a guide dog and is denied entry, and that is not right. It’s hard enough, in itself, with disability, to find yourself on public transport and get where you’re going without having a bus driver telling you that your dog can’t come on the bus. So if we can do anything within this House to provide more fluid, easier transitions for people who, on a daily and hourly basis, have to grapple with the obstacles that a disability presents, then that’s a good thing to get done.

This bill will help ensure more Kiwis are protected from discrimination under the Act and, hopefully, enhance their rights under the Act as well. Labour supports this as a positive change, one that will modernise out-of-date language in the Human Rights Act and also protect the basic rights of those New Zealanders who are living with a disability.

We would like to acknowledge all those that have done this, and I’ve already mentioned Mojo Mathers, but there’s a couple of other people who I would personally like to mention, and they are the people that have shaped my further understanding of disability issues in New Zealand. Number one would be Ruth Dyson. Ruth Dyson was a fearsome champion for disability rights, within the Labour Party and within Government, who took on that role and really owned it, who fought strongly, and was always available to provide advice and information in relation to issues—and I learnt a lot as a new MP with her wisdom.

The second person who I’ve learnt a lot about is someone who’s now passed away, and his name was Mike Grigg. He was a strong advocate, a person with autism who was fearsome in his advocateship for accessibility. As soon as I became a member of Parliament in Hutt South, I was told, in no uncertain terms, that I would have to seek a meeting or Mike would seek me out. And, no doubt, he did that with every single elected official, whether they be from local, regional, or central government, and he, in his fight for increased accessibility for himself and his son, taught me a lot. So I would like to mention Mike and all he has done for the disability community in New Zealand and in the Hutt.

We support this bill because it aligns with our values and it is important that we protect the basic right of disabled New Zealanders to live free from discrimination. It makes a simple but effective change to our human rights law to help ensure that it covers the wide range of support dogs that assist disabled New Zealanders today.

Section 21 of the Human Rights Act, which lays out the prohibited grounds for discrimination, is enshrined in the heart of our human rights framework. And it specifically identifies guide dogs under the clauses that relate to discrimination against disabled people.

At that point, I would like refer to some of the submissions that were received at the Social Services and Community Committee. I’d like to acknowledge those members—Angie Warren-Clark and those members of the Social Services and Community Committee that went through this bill, added to it, and heard those submissions. The Human Rights Commission gave a very strong submission in terms of what this does and I’d like to quickly refer to what they’ve pointed out, because I think it nails it pretty well. It says, in their submission, that “This Bill represents another small step to enable disabled New Zealanders, using disability assist dogs, … to live fulfilling lives and [to] participate in an equitable and accessible society.”; and I think that is so important. They reference that this bill aligns with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, particularly Article 9, relating to accessibility.

The New Zealand Government stands by the fact that it has an obligation to take appropriate methods to ensure that disabled people have rights and have access on an equal basis with others. And we need to be able to identify where that discrimination is occurring, and this bill takes a step in that direction.

I think it’s also important to talk about the types of things that guide dogs do, because, typically, we think that they just help somebody get from A to B, but they do a whole lot more than that. They help to alert deaf people if there is a fire alarm in their home, if the doorbell is ringing. They help people who have epilepsy to manage seizures. They also help retrieve objects for people who are in wheelchairs. They might even help a handler with limited mobility with everyday activities such as opening a door or getting something. They also provide support for those people with autism, those who are neurodiverse; they provide that support and ability. And, as a society, as we get more perceptive about identifying and understanding the neurodiverse spectrum, it’s really important we also identify ways that help people get on with their day-to-day lives, and if having a dog nearby makes that better, then so be it—in terms of my point of view.

In some cases, dogs even save lives. It’s important to note that, for those they assist, these dogs are much more than just a tool, they are a loved and trusted companion, and they are a doorway into enjoying a more fulsome life. We need to make sure that we not only support by giving kindly when we see collections at the supermarket or at our street, to make sure we have more guide dogs and more encouragement for supporting those organisations, but that we recognise that dutiful role that guide dogs play to people and that they are such a critical part of their lives.

I think it’s also important to note that, when discussing this bill, the definition sets a high standard. The previous bill set a very high standard for what is included under the Human Rights Act. They must be certified as one of the eight organisations, they must meet very specific criteria in order to be certified. So it’s not the case that any person will be able to claim that an animal is a disability assist dog and try and claim that protection under the Act.

So for some of the examples that I’ve just provided, it does not seem right or fair that you would deny someone the ability to have that support just for the fact that it doesn’t meet the criteria stipulated in legislation—that seems antiquated and this bill seeks to rectify it, which is a good thing.

Our wider support for disabled New Zealanders—this is part of what we support in going forward. And it is really important that we pay reference to the New Zealand Disability Strategy that spans for a decade, 2016 to 2026. The strategy and the Disability Action Plan are key mechanisms for continuing the work that we do today, to continue to progress New Zealand’s realisation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Disability Action Plan is the primary vehicle, in New Zealand, that we seek to continue to make these gains. It is comprised of 29 comprehensive work programmes and aligned with outcomes that deliver, each day, in different ways, to try and make these barriers, that we see, fewer.

While we are seeing promising progress across Government, there is always much more work to be done. It is critical that actions and work programmes, agreed in the Disability Action Plan, are progressed. And these happen from central government right down to day-to-day work we see in our local and regional councils.

I’d like to quickly mention that, in conclusion, there have been other great bills passed, improving access of individuals with disability to participate as candidates in general elections—Chlöe Swarbrick passed that bill in the last Parliament. There’s some great members’ bills that continue to advocate and promote rights for the disability community. I’d like to finish by congratulating the member for bringing a great bill to the House and I look forward to more bills, just like this, coming forward. I commend it to the House.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I too take pleasure in standing to speak to this Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill in its second reading tonight.

Just very briefly, I would like to touch on what the bill actually does, and it’s very simple: it, simply, amends the Human Rights Act 1993 and it replaces the reference to “guide dogs” to “disability assist dogs”—and in the interests of brevity, I’ll call them “DADs”. So we are putting reference to these DADs into the Human Rights Act, and that Act has been borrowed from the Dog Control Act and I’ll touch on that a little bit later.

The reason that this bill was deemed necessary—and I take the opportunity to acknowledge Ricardo Menéndez March for shepherding it through the House, but I also would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge Mojo Mathers who brought this bill initially to the Parliament. She was a very active proponent of disability issues while she was in Parliament. But the reason that this came up was because there was clear evidence that there was discrimination against people who were using their DADs—their disability assist dogs. But we also know that they were absolutely essential in making them able to participate in society.

This has two changes that are coming through in this bill. Section 2 in the Human Rights Act and section 21, replacing the “guide dogs”. I’d like to echo the submission made this afternoon by my colleague Penny Simmonds in the Human Rights Act and the Dog Control Act, and by bringing the Dog Control Act descriptor into this bill, it actually brings with it that the requirement that the list of organisations that are able to be recognised as approved training providers or entities for the disability assist dogs is quite prescriptive, and I think there is a really good opportunity to improve this bill even further by perhaps using the competencies that organisations must have and the standards that they must reach, rather than naming entities, because, as we know, when we come into this House, legislation can age quite quickly, and by naming organisations, we run the risk of those organisations changing in some way—they can merge, they can close down, or they can simply change their name, and that therefore would make the legislation out of date. So I think there is merit in exploring that and I understand Penny Simmons will be presenting a Supplementary Order Paper to that effect in the committee of the whole House.

So we look forward to improving this little piece of legislation even further, and I commend it to the House.

Kia ora mai rā tātou ngā mema o te Whare. Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. It’s a privilege to speak tonight on the Human Rights (Disability Assist Dogs Non-Discrimination) Amendment Bill. May I start by acknowledging all of those who live and work with dogs in service, whether they are disability assist dogs or those who serve in the line of active duty, whether it’s in the police or the armed services or in customs and biosecurity. Every one of those dogs has an important role, and the training and their welfare is of utmost importance. I want to acknowledge how important those dogs are to your lives.

This bill would ensure that people who rely on disability assist dogs are afforded the same rights as those who use guide dogs, and those might be people with epilepsy, with Alzheimer’s, with post-traumatic stress disorder, or with neuromuscular disease, and that disability assist dog can have the freedom to go to all of the places that they can, including shops and public transport. It’s important that everyone, regardless of their ability to get around, of their mobility, can access transport.

It’s at this juncture that I want to acknowledge the work of Barney Koneferenisi from South Auckland. He’s a tireless advocate for mobility of all people in our area. He’s a Paralympian. He has fund-raised for a ride-sharing service to make it easier for people not just to get around on public transport—which he also advocates for, and he’s a big voice for using the trains in Auckland and the buses in Māngere—but also to link up those services with a ride-share service which acknowledges people of different levels of mobility and people who find it difficult to use ride-share services, like women and young people after certain hours. His work is important in ensuring that people can get around and can get to the places they need to go, and this bill helps in doing that too, in that people will be able to bring the dogs that they need with them.

How does this bill do that? Well, it amends the Human Rights Act 1993 to enhance protections for discrimination for people who rely on disability assist dogs. It’s important that it happens at that level of our constitutional framework, in the Human Rights Act, which is a foundational piece of legislation and gives rights in a number of other pieces of legislation, which are empowered by it. Making it at that level is an important part of this bill, and I want to acknowledge the member Ricardo Menéndez March, and also Mojo Mathers for her work in this space, which is all about human rights. People’s access to services, shops, and public spaces, like libraries, is absolutely about someone’s fundamental rights to participate in the community in which they belong, and it’s right that it’s acknowledged in that piece of legislation.

Now, let me talk a little bit more about why this is so important, as what looks like a small change. On the question of whether it’s the only thing for people who rely on disability assist dogs: well, the answer is no. Disabled New Zealanders have the right to live free from discrimination, and this bill realises that for some, but it’s a change happening on the backdrop of further Government progress in this area. A commitment that this Government takes seriously is around building a more inclusive and accessible society and ensuring disabled people have the same rights and opportunities as other New Zealanders. I want to add there that it’s not just about these people who this bill helps; it’s also about their families and their community who would miss out on having them participate in their lives were we not making active strides in making it more possible for them to participate.

I think of people like my own father, who has limited mobility and will at some point need a great deal of assistance to get around. The amount that his community and my own family would lose if he was not able to go to tangihanga, if he was not able to go to the meetings that he loves to go to, would be huge. So the cost of this has to be weighed against the contribution of those people who we really care about and who offer so much.

Progress on disability issues continues to be realised through the disability-focused funding across many Government portfolios. Those are things like ACC, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Development, and the Ministry of Education. Within that, the aim is to progress the rights and opportunities for disabled people through the New Zealand Disability Strategy 2016-2026. It’s that action plan that has key mechanisms for progressing New Zealand’s realisation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. When we talk about how important it is in New Zealand’s constitutional framework to make changes to the Human Rights Act, because it is foundational, it is also important that we give effect to the UN convention and be seen on the world stage as a part of a global community that is doing more for people with disabilities and to empower everyone around them to help them lead the best lives that they can. I believe it’s critical that actions and work programmes agreed in the Disability Action Plan are progressed, and this will improve the lives of people in New Zealand who rely on disability assist dogs and everyone around them.

The importance of this bill has been well traversed, and I want to thank the committee that very carefully considered the submissions of this sector. It is important to take time to listen to what those advocates are saying to us in this space. It is important to get this sort of legislation and all of the legislative architecture around it right so that in future we’re able take progressive steps forward to deliver more and more of what people with different mobility needs in our community are saying to us.

It’s also special for me to be standing here to support my Green colleague’s bill, because it is something that aligns with my deeply held Labour values. Those are the protections of the basic rights of disabled New Zealanders to live free from discrimination, and this being a pretty simple but effective change to human rights law to help ensure that it covers a wide range of support dogs that assist disabled New Zealanders today.

Sorry, Mr Speaker; you’ll forgive me if I sound a little breathless. It’s not because I’m excited about this legislation, although it is a great bill; it’s because I recovered three weeks ago from COVID.

Section 21 of the Human Rights Act, which lays out the prohibited grounds of discrimination, is enshrined at the heart of our human rights framework and specifically identifies guide dogs, but it doesn’t include all of the dogs who perform these roles that we’ve heard about tonight. That change might seem like something we could gloss over, like something that the organisations who are accredited to provide the accreditation for these dogs—the eight that have been mentioned in this House—might be able to ignore, but that’s not really the point. The point is that this legislation needs to empower those organisations, to empower the people who train and work with the dogs, and to empower the people who the dogs serve—and to empower the dogs themselves. This is also about recognising that they are an important part of someone’s life, that they are an extension of someone’s body, and that they are far more than just a pet or a very well-loved part of the family; that they have a job to do as well. It’s too narrow, and this change is important in widening that.

I hear the calls around the House about possibly extending the nature of those organisations. I think this bill is empowering for those organisations by naming them as well. It’s important that we recognise the good work that’s going on in this sector for many years by organisations who are staffed—many of them by volunteers; some paid—by a huge number of people who have dedicated their lives and a huge amount of care and love to this sector. I want to acknowledge those organisations tonight. Those are Assistance Dogs New Zealand, Hearing Dogs for Deaf People New Zealand, K9 Medical Detection New Zealand, K9 SEARCH Medical Detection, Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust, New Zealand Epilepsy Assist Dogs Trust, Perfect Partners Assist Dogs Trust, and the Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind Incorporated. All of those organisations should be acknowledged tonight because of the work that they do and the important role they have in serving the community.

I want to finish by saying that I support this bill and my Green colleague who is taking it through. All of the work of the committee and of him should be celebrated, because it is a step forward where we can all, as parliamentarians, agree on a small change which we can make and that we can all agree to. It’s an example of great cross-partisan work and consensus building. So, well done to him. Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity, and I commend this bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.